I wonder..........

[Roost 1]

Of all the velvet bucks that were killed over the weekend, I wonder many would of got a pass if TN was a 1 buck state.
Successful velvet hunters please feel free to share your opinions.
Congrats to all successful hunters.

 

[Goodtimekiller]

80%?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ZachMarkus]

Not mine[emoji2]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Roost 1]

Not mine[emoji2]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I already knew...... :tu:

 

[JCDEERMAN]

Not mine as well. I would never pass up the opportunity at a personal best - in this case, best bow buck. I am already committed to not hunting until I have a muzzleloader in my hand.

 

[Andy S.]

If it helps the discussion any, last I looked there were 781 bucks checked in for 95 counties. Out of those 777, 648 (82%) had 7-11+ points. That leads me to believe that the majority of hunters (4 out of 5) most likely categorized their buck as a "good to great" buck for their respective area.

 

[JCDEERMAN]

If it helps the discussion any, last I looked there were 781 bucks checked in for 95 counties. Out of those 777, 648 (82%) had 7-11+ points. That leads me to believe that the majority of hunters (4 out of 5) most likely categorized their buck as a "good to great" buck for their respective area.

Thanks for that info, Andy! Very intriguing!

 

[Matador]

That is interesting data. I would think most would be classified as good bucks for their area. Probably not any good reliable data, but it would be more interesting to see how many gross scored 120, 130, 140 etc. There was several great bucks killed.

 

[JAY B]

If it helps the discussion any, last I looked there were 781 bucks checked in for 95 counties. Out of those 777, 648 (82%) had 7-11+ points. That leads me to believe that the majority of hunters (4 out of 5) most likely categorized their buck as a "good to great" buck for their respective area.

 

[TheLBLman]

Congrats to all successful hunters.

x 2

Of course, the lower the limit, the higher most hunters' shooter buck standards.
But I continue to believe the 2-buck limit is the best solution for the most hunters.

Just looking at the harvest data, one very interesting data point stands out.
I have my theories, but would love to hear what others think.

Why did Sullivan County have such a high "velvet" buck harvest?

If my count was correct, only one other of TN's 95 counties had a higher kill than Sullivan Co.

Interestingly, many of TN's normal high-deer density counties had relatively low velvet buck kills,
such as Weakley County with only 3 reported.

 

[Brogers1]

On our property this is the best time of year for big bucks to pattern up. By the time season normally starts these big guys have vanished and we never see them again until next year around the same time before season starts.

 

[gobblinfool]

Its always easy to judge one self and your actions after you did something. I think there is a lot to factor in when you decide to shoot. When I saw the buck I shot in my binos, I knew immediately that I wanted to shoot. My goal was to shoot a deer that was 3.5yr old or older with my bow. I know this isnt the standard for many people, but it was my goal. If TN was a 1 buck state would I have passed? Hard to say, why? Velvet makes the deer look bigger, I didnt have a clue how my buck would score, but didnt care either, with that said, when the velvet comes off, naturally the rack is smaller. Lucky for me I can hunt Ft Campbell and KY. Now that I have a decent buck down, I will be more patient in those other locations. Obviously not everyone can travel to hunt, so in my mind that is a factor. One thing is for certain.....I don't regret shooting the deer I did.....and with only 1 tag left, I will shoot something bigger or eat it.

 

[TheLBLman]

Speaking of that 1-buck limit,
and not saying this with any criticism, as I do understand why some prefer it,
but note how many of the 1-buck advocates do in fact hunt in more than one state,
thereby not having to quit "buck hunting" after they limit out.

The majority of TN's deer hunters only hunt in TN.

Each state does things a bit differently.
The 1-buck limit has worked well for KY.
IMO, our 2-buck limit works better for most TN hunters.

 

[gobblinfool]

LBLman that is a great point!! I find it interesting as well that it was only a couple years ago it was a 3 buck limit.

 

[Roost 1]

Speaking of that 1-buck limit,
and not saying this with any criticism, as I do understand why some prefer it,
but note how many of the 1-buck advocates do in fact hunt in more than one state,
thereby not having to quit "buck hunting" after they limit out.

The majority of TN's deer hunters only hunt in TN.

Each state does things a bit differently.
The 1-buck limit has worked well for KY.
IMO, our 2-buck limit works better for most TN hunters.

Where are all the guys that say TN cant grow big deer?? I can already tell the 2 buck limit is paying off for the guys that prefer to hunt trophy class deer... :stir:
I have said for years TN has better deer hunting (trophy class animals) then a lot of people wanted to admit. We are seeing this now.

 

[Mike Belt]

I suspect that knowing they still had another buck tag in their pocket after shooting their first buck some hunters shot a deer that would have otherwise walked during this recent archery hunt. Evidently there were some killed that the hunters would have taken regardless of the season. Congrats to those hunters. I also suspect that if the buck limit had remained at 3 bucks there would have been more killed. Some people just can't regulate themselves. That's why we have a limit. The 2 buck limit allows for regulating numbers but has nothing to do with regulating size, although that 2 buck limit indirectly affects size by virtue of allowing for more bucks to walk thus attaining age and possibly size. I think it's a great compromise and doesn't discriminate between classes of hunters.

 

[megalomaniac]

This was an amazing hunt. I had mature deer moving during daylight on trail camera. That won't happen again until the rut.

That being said, I had zero plans of killing anything short of going on the wall. I saw and passed some nice bucks, the best being an estimated 3.5 y/o that would score 125". He was pretty, but just not big enough for me to want to spend the extra money for a velvet mount and having to deal with the carcass in the heat.

I'm different than most, simply because I already have a self imposed 1 buck limit. Would I have shot that buck if we had a 2 buck limit on my farm? Probably not, as we've got so many bucks this year that are bigger... some WAY bigger.

One CANNOT argue there are more older and higher scoring bucks in TN than ever before. That is not debatable. Whether that would have happened without going to the 2 buck limit or not can be argued however. Personally, I feel pretty confident the 2 buck limit is responsible.

 

[poorhunter]

If it helps the discussion any, last I looked there were 781 bucks checked in for 95 counties. Out of those 777, 648 (82%) had 7-11+ points. That leads me to believe that the majority of hunters (4 out of 5) most likely categorized their buck as a "good to great" buck for their respective area.

Easiest time of year to kill big deer...August.

 

[Roost 1]

If it helps the discussion any, last I looked there were 781 bucks checked in for 95 counties. Out of those 777, 648 (82%) had 7-11+ points. That leads me to believe that the majority of hunters (4 out of 5) most likely categorized their buck as a "good to great" buck for their respective area.

Easiest time of year to kill big deer...August.

I agree 100%!!!! Even 1 week later makes a huge difference as the KY hunters will find out this weekend.

 

[TheLBLman]

One CANNOT argue there are more older and higher scoring bucks in TN than ever before. That is not debatable. Whether that would have happened without going to the 2 buck limit or not can be argued however. Personally, I feel pretty confident the 2 buck limit is responsible.

I agree, at least in that the 2 buck limit has been a significant factor.
It did appear we were reversing course once we went to that simple 3-buck limit.

One thing many overlook:

The first big change in hunter mindset (regarding increasing standards on personal "shooter" bucks, as well as seeing taking a doe for meat instead of a buck)
actually begin in 1998 when we went from an 11-buck limit to a 2-buck limit. THAT was a HUGE CHANGE!
In 1999, although the statewide limit went up to 3 (if taken with multiple weapons) the centerfire "rifle" traditional deer season limit remained only 2 thereafter for many years.

This was the long period of time (since 1999) during which TN had the more complicated "two-three" buck limit,
whereby the only way to take 3 bucks were if you took at least one with something other than a centerfire rifle,
and that would also mean taking at least one of those bucks OUTSIDE the traditional "gun" deer season
(such as one during the early archery season).

During this time period, we were progressively seeing an increased aging of our harvested bucks.
Then we went to that simple 3-buck limit, doubled the November muzzleloading days, and buck age structure began deteriorating.
The more recent change back to simple 2-buck limit (like was done in 1998) seems to have put buck age structure back on the increase.

But as more hunters, particularly non-resident ones, jump on this velvet buck bandwagon scheme,
I'm concerned we are once again going backwards.

Watch what happens in August 2019 (assuming the velvet hunt continues).
2018 participation was extremely low because so few realized it was an option soon enough,
particularly in the case of non-resident hunters.
IMO, the velvet buck hunt would turn into a true disaster (after 2019) for buck age structure if we still had a 3-buck limit.

 

[TheLBLman]

Just to be clear:

I believe the velvet hunt, as implemented, has done more overall harm than good,
and for a fact, it's existence reduced the number of young squirrel hunters heading to the woods
as this "velvet" hunt over-lapped the traditional opening weekend of squirrel season.

If the future of hunting relies heavily on recruiting new lifetime hunters,
is a summertime archery velvet hunt more beneficial or harmful?

Add to this as the velvet harvest increases, how does this effect the later success (Oct & Nov)
of more average and novice hunters?

The velvet hunt is a great example of the commission catering to "special interests"
at the expense of the majority of TN's hunters, not just TN's deer hunters?
TWRA did NOT recommend this velvet hunt ---- the Commission simply "did" it against TWRA's recommendations.

Perhaps the Commission will institute a July "spotted fawn" hunt next year
as there may be a few wanting to take a "spotted" trophy?

 

[Andy S.]

.....as this "velvet" hunt over-lapped the traditional opening weekend of squirrel season.

This is my biggest gripe with the "early velvet" hunt. I personally do not like it overlapping with traditional squirrel opener. Due to the fact that I chose to squirrel hunt like I have for the last 25 years, I did not participate in the early velvet archery hunt.

The velvet hunt is a great example of the commission catering to "special interests"
at the expense of the majority of TN's hunters, not just TN's deer hunters?
TWRA did NOT recommend this velvet hunt ---- the Commission simply "did" it against TWRA's recommendations.

This seems to be more the norm these days than not. If and when I ever testify before the commission, I will reiterate their duty to listen to and consider the voices/opinions of the wildlife professionals and the biologists, the ones that work for TWRA. I am not a fan of knee jerk reactions at the demand of a few. With that said, I am all for the velvet hunt if hunters want it, TWRA endorses it, and the way forward is well planned and thought out, and not just pushed down TWRA's throat with little to no say so. That way of doing business is getting old real quick.

 

[MUP]

Just to be clear:

I believe the velvet hunt, as implemented, has done more overall harm than good,
and for a fact, it's existence reduced the number of young squirrel hunters heading to the woods
as this "velvet" hunt over-lapped the traditional opening weekend of squirrel season.

If the future of hunting relies heavily on recruiting new lifetime hunters,
is a summertime archery velvet hunt more beneficial or harmful?

Add to this as the velvet harvest increases, how does this effect the later success (Oct & Nov)
of more average and novice hunters?

The velvet hunt is a great example of the commission catering to "special interests"
at the expense of the majority of TN's hunters, not just TN's deer hunters?
TWRA did NOT recommend this velvet hunt ---- the Commission simply "did" it against TWRA's recommendations.

Perhaps the Commission will institute a July "spotted fawn" hunt next year
as there may be a few wanting to take a "spotted" trophy?

Yes indeed. So who knows what may be coming if commissioners are just throwing ideas to the wall to see what sticks?

 

[gobblinfool]

Yall used to be able to kill 11 bucks during 1 deer season prior to 99???

 

[muddyboots]

Interesting topic. I didn't participate in the early hunt. I guess because I'm busy right now and the hot weather just didn't interest me. Nor the velvet antlers. Not to take away from anyone who did. Their were some stud bucks killed. Congrats to all. It would be very hard for me to judge because in my eyes the velvet makes a 100 inch deer look huge. That's just me. That's another reason I didn't go. The buck age structure is getting good in Tennessee and I say the 2 buck limit changing peoples mind set is 100 per cent responsible. If we had a 3 buck limit I bet a lot more bucks would have been shot. Good discussion for sure.

 

[megalomaniac]

Again, I THOROUGLY LOVED the new hunt. Mostly because I hadn't been in the woods since April hunting. It was nice to get back out, even if only a weekend. Secondly, it was not a wasted weekend hunting either. At this point, I only hunt when I have a chance at killing a mature deer. Before now, that was strictly mid Nov in TN, 3rd week of Dec in TN, then 1st week of Jan in MS locally. I actually think I had a better chance of killing a fully mature deer on this hunt that I will have in Nov during the rut.

Was it hot during mid day? sure it was, but I didn't even bother hunting on stand as long as I will during the rut. I hunted for about 2h in the am and only 1.5h in the eve. Would I have wanted to fool with caring for a deer after the shot- heck, no... but I would have, if I could have killed one of my target bucks.

As far as the kids go, I would have brought one or two up for the hunt if it didn't conflict with school. It's getting harder for them to miss days and get caught back up the older they get. I borrowed and hunted with a crossbow for the first time, that thing is so easy to shoot, my 11 y/o little girl could have used it and killed one.

I don't know how many more will participate next year, but 750 bucks killed statewide this year is nowhere near going to affect anything biologically. We may lose 10x more than that in the next month due to EHD. I'd rather have a velvet stud on the wall than find him rotting alongside a creek.

 

[TheLBLman]

Yall used to be able to kill 11 bucks during 1 deer season prior to 99???

1997 was the last year of the 11-buck limit.
Went from 11 to 2 in 1998.
Then to that long-running 3-buck limit in 1999, provided no more than 2 were killed during a "rifle" season segment.
For the majority of TN's hunters, this was therefore a 2-buck limit, since they mainly or only hunted during the traditional "rifle" deer season.

But more recently when the buck limit then went to "simply 3" (any way you want them), AND the November muzzleloader hunt days were doubled (this prior to the traditional rifle season), that's when age structure plateaued and appeared to be reversing. For most hunters, this became a 50% increase in the buck limit, AND many started muzzleloading hunting simultaneously when the "pre-season" muzzleloader opportunity went from 1 week to 2 weeks.

Then, back to the current simple 2-buck limit, three or four years ago.
Prior to this, the last time we had had a "simple" 2-buck limit was 1998.

Whatever the buck limit, it may mean less today than ever, but it remains an important component of deer management.
Other variables can trump the buck limit.

It's entirely possible that a summertime velvet hunt COULD increase the annual number of bucks killed more than would occur by raising the buck limit from the current 2 to 4. The total kill can be more about collective hunting (number of hunters afield x how many hrs annually) than whatever the limit.

On the other hand, hunter attitudes (desire to kill vs desire to hold out for older, bigger) play an increasing role, the lower the limit.
Never mind we have a 3 doe a day limit in much the state, yet most hunters do not kill more than 1 deer, period, in an entire year.

As many have observed, even most accomplished deer hunters today, who measure their annual time afield in weeks instead of days, relatively few are willing to drag out more deer annually than they want to eat or have mounted. For most, that magic number seems to be two or less.

This brings us back to answering this question:

"How do we provide the most quality opportunities for the most hunters to kill one or two deer annually?"

Provided the deer herd is not near extinction,
my answer has always been by providing 100% "either-sex" hunting opportunities,
and typically with annual doe limits equal or exceeding the annual buck limit.

 

[TheLBLman]

750 bucks killed statewide this year is nowhere near going to affect anything biologically.

At first thought, that sounds logical, biological.

But think along here a moment . . . . . .

This first year, due to this sudden change and a lack of effective or timely communications,
most deer hunters either didn't know about it, didn't have time to prepare for it, and/or had zero interest hunting deer in the summertime.

It will be very different in subsequent years.
Hunters will be able to plan ahead, request off those vacation days, plan their travels.
Unless other states start offering August "velvet" hunts,
Tennessee will become the nation's #1 destination state for "velvet" buck hunting.

750 this year, 7,500 next year, maybe 75,000 in the future.

And we're generally not talking about the killing of "average" bucks.
Even that 750 taken this first year, might be more like the top-end bucks that are typically included in a 1500-buck kill?

Also, this first year, the "velvet" hunt was only allowed on private lands.
The buck kill would have been tremendously higher if public lands had been allowed.

I suspect, we will hear two new demands next year should the velvet hunt continue:

1) Open it up to public lands;
2) Legalize corn baiting

You can look for a huge increase in non-resident hunters flocking to TN next year.
Of course, to some, this is a good thing, and may have been the main reason a commissioner suddenly demanded "velvet" buck hunting.

Was this whole idea more an outfitting ploy to make TN a "different" kind of "trophy" destination state?
Was it just because one or two people with enough pull got the commissioners to do it?
What was really behind it?

Keep in mind most TN deer hunters do not own a bow or a crossbow, and do not "archery" hunt.
Might there have have been other ways to increase opportunities for most hunters instead of a few special interests?

 

[TheLBLman]

I don't think the sky is falling.
But sure want to be sure we think this thing though,
as we sure were not given much opportunity to think about it previously.

Many of you could soon find out what KY resident hunters think about "outfitters" and non-residents driving up lease prices.

Personally, I hope one of these three happens before this time in 2019.
- in order of preference, any one -

1) The summertime "velvet" hunt in TN becomes an abandoned idea.

2) All other states surrounding us start doing an August "velvet" hunt.

3) TN goes to a 1-buck limit if they continue with the "velvet" buck hunt.

 

[TheLBLman]

Again, how come so many "velvet" bucks were killed in Sullivan County?
How come so few were killed in Weakley County?